This Is Why I Hate HOAs

[IanHarrop 42]

He had a very obvious choice. He could have battered one of his arms with the gun until it bled and then leaving a blood trail, lead the bear away from the community to a wooded area where weak and tired from the loss of blood he could have simply thrown himself down as a sacrifice. The bear would have fed and learned that food is not found at the community but rather in the woods. As such the community would no longer be bothered by bear or this individual that they obviously don't like. Of course there would have been a loss of revenue so perhaps they could still fine him for something like littering for the blood trail left in the community.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Was this gentleman not aware of the rule? He always had the option of not living there....

So, if the bear had been attacking a small child, would it be your opinion that using a gun to kill the bear and save the child should not be an option? After all, we wouldn't want to violate a homeowner's association rule.

Would the child's death by bear-attack be the parent's fault for choosing to live in a state where bears exist? Gosh, we better evacuate everyone under the age of 18 from half the states in America, immediately!

[Rebecca 0]

Quote

Quote

Was this gentleman not aware of the rule? He always had the option of not living there....

So, if the bear had been attacking a small child, would it be your opinion that using a gun to kill the bear and save the child should not be an option? After all, we wouldn't want to violate a homeowner's association rule.

I think the point is that one should know all the rules and know what they're getting into. You can't expect to move into an area adjacent to woods where bears live, with a child and a gun, AND a HOA ban on guns and expect to not get fined if you should have to use the gun - even in defense.

You live away from bear habitat with a gun, or you live in a gun-friendly community.

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[miked10270 0]

Is it just me?

Surely the way out of this is for the homeowner to countersue the HOA for failing to exclude the bear, thus causing him distress and fear!!!?

At least that way TWO sets of lawyers get to make money...

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

or you live in a gun-friendly community.

I live in Texas and not in the ultra-liberal ground zero of Austin, so I'm good to go...now all I need are some bears and a kid.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

I hope to high heaven that I never have to live with an HOA.

I don't think anyone will ever force you to live with an HOA. It's your choice. This man made the choice to buy a home that involved an HOA, he broke the rules, and now he's being fined. That's the way it works.

The story doesn't mention anything about him talking to the HOA or the state wildlife program about his bear problem before shooting the bear; perhaps that would have been a better route for him to take.

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

Quote

If you are going to move into known bear country, be prepared for encounters and be knowledgable on what to do.

I agree.

I used to live in the city where I had a problem with Raccoons. Couldn't shoot 'em with out breaking the law. Took up archery.

No problem.

Maybe this guy shouldv'e bought a good cross bow and set up a blind in his yard. The neighbors probably wouldn't have been able to fine him for that. (The game warden might have issues though)

illegible usually

[AggieDave 6]

A bow, an arrow and a stick of dynomite...like the Duke Boys...That would fuck up the bear.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I don't think anyone will ever force you to live with an HOA. It's your choice. This man made the choice to buy a home that involved an HOA, he broke the rules, and now he's being fined. That's the way it works.

Actually, you can be forced to live with one. HOAs aren't only created in new neighborhoods. A bunch of ignorant and/or angry neighbors can create one. Yes, they can make it apply to you even though you've lived there since before it existed and don't support it.

Not the case in this story, but it can and does happen.

Quote

The story doesn't mention anything about him talking to the HOA or the state wildlife program about his bear problem before shooting the bear; perhaps that would have been a better route for him to take.

It doesn't mention him not doing those things either.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I think the point is that one should know all the rules and know what they're getting into. You can't expect to move into an area adjacent to woods where bears live, with a child and a gun, AND a HOA ban on guns and expect to not get fined if you should have to use the gun - even in defense.

You live away from bear habitat with a gun, or you live in a gun-friendly community.

I agree wholeheartedly that people need to read th fine print.

However, just a clarification, the HOA rules banned firing a gun in the area, not owning one. I don't think even the life-sucking all-encompassing nature of HOA contracts can touch that.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Casurf1978 0]

You think thats bad. A HOA here in So Cal had a family friend take out some trees he planted in his front yard because the HOA did not list them as appropriate trees one is allowed to plant. HOAs are usually run by pretty anal people too.

[billvon 3,111]

>I don't think even the life-sucking all-encompassing nature of
>HOA contracts can touch that.

Of course they can; some HOA's near me prohibit things that are protected by state law (like solar power installations.) All it means is that if you take them to court you'll probably win.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Actually, you can be forced to live with one. HOAs aren't only created in new neighborhoods. A bunch of ignorant and/or angry neighbors can create one. Yes, they can make it apply to you even though you've lived there since before it existed and don't support it.

It is still your choice. You could always sell your home and move on.

Quote

It doesn't mention him not doing those things either.

So you're comdemning the HOA in this story based on facts that you do not have.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Not so easy to get out once you've bought a home and locked into a HOA.

That's the sort of reason people use to get skydiving operations closed down once they buy a house next to a DZ. "Yeah, so I knew it was an airport, but I didn't think airplanes made noise! I demand that the airport be shut down to protect my hearing and property values."

People should either accept the rules and conditions on the home they decide to buy, or they should buy one somewhere else. I have zero sympathy for people who buy into a home because it's a good deal and then start complaining about what they agreed to when they bought it.

In many regions of the country, it's extremely difficult to find housing that is not covered by an HOA and CC&Rs. Unlike skydiving, housing is a basic need. And while it's predictable that airplanes will continue to make noise, it's hard to fathom that an HOA will fine you for defending your life.

We're past the point where some degree of fair play needs to be injected into this concept. I imagine legislation will happen in the next decade.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

Solution: find houses of HOA board members... Take large crap on their driveway, spread it out with a squeege...[/8-year-old]

• Quote

[kallend 2,146]

It's a free country. This guy was not forced to sign a contract obligating him to comply with the HOA rules. He had the option of living elsewhere. I don't have an iota of sympathy with him.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,111]

>And while it's predictable that airplanes will continue to make noise,
>it's hard to fathom that an HOA will fine you for defending your life.

I do not find it suprising at all that an HOA that says they will fine you if you discharge a weapon would fine you if you discharge a weapon. As long as people happily sign up to such rules, they will persist. Once we refuse to buy houses where such rules exist, they will evaporate very quickly.

>We're past the point where some degree of fair play needs to be injected
>into this concept. I imagine legislation will happen in the next decade.

I prefer personal actions that determine the course of a free market to legislation, myself. Why not do things ourselves instead of asking the government to do it for us? Some people here seem to get extremely upset when the government does that in other areas (i.e. attempt to pass laws to protect people from gun misuse.)

We don't need more laws, just more people willing to put their money where their mouth is. I think that's far more effective than lobbying for a bigger government.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

It is still your choice. You could always sell your home and move on.

OK, so I'm going go gather the most bigotted, racist, hillybilly rednecks you've ever seen.

-I'm going to buy them houses in your neighborhood.

-They're going to create your local HOA.

-It will become rule that you can't have any stickers on your car except NRA and RNC.

-It will become rule that you must attend weekly meetings on be fined.

-At said meetings, you will have to recite the pledge of allegiance, support the KKK, denounce homosexuality, and fire a gun into the air randomly.

-Anyone not doing so will be fined twice.

If you complain, it's your own fault. Forget that your hopme is your castle. You lose.

Oh yeah, one more thing:

-They are going to follow you to every neighborhood and subdivision that you can find, and run that local HOA.

But it's a free country, so tough shit for you, right?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Shotgun 1]

Ok, go for it. When it happens, I'll deal with it.

Oh, and good luck finding enough bigotted, racist, hillybilly rednecks who are capable of 1.) creating an HOA and 2.) being able to afford houses where I live.

I imagine your example is pretty far from what happened in this particular story.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>We're past the point where some degree of fair play needs to be injected
>into this concept. I imagine legislation will happen in the next decade.

I prefer personal actions that determine the course of a free market to legislation, myself. Why not do things ourselves instead of asking the government to do it for us? Some people here seem to get extremely upset when the government does that in other areas (i.e. attempt to pass laws to protect people from gun misuse.)

It's long been demonstrated that the 'free market' concept does not always lead to an ideal equilibrium. Basic human needs (read: electricity in California) will always need to be regulated. Prior issues with housing include discrimination in renting and selling of homes. Free market doesn't stop that. Nor does it prevent a loss of due or fair process. All of this leads to excesses well beyond Irvine's color restrictions on paint.

Your gun control example is a red herring at best. Americans have a right to arm and defend themselves. That is another basic human right. Except at this HOA apparently. So let's go with the child example - should the homeowner put down his gun and call Animal Control?

Wouldn't that, or the actual situation, be in direct contradiction to your suggestion: "Why not do things ourselves instead of asking the government to do it for us?"

[billvon 3,111]

>It's long been demonstrated that the 'free market' concept does not
> always lead to an ideal equilibrium. Basic human needs (read: electricity
> in California . . .)

Very bad example! Utilities were required to a) sell electricity at a fixed rate; b) maintain service no matter what and c) pay whatever generators asked. If you were selling electricity to a utility, and you could charge whatever you chose (and know they would pay it) what would you charge per kwh? It's a perfect example of how partial regulation can be worse than no regulation at all.

>Your gun control example is a red herring at best. Americans have a right
> to arm and defend themselves. That is another basic human right.
>Except at this HOA apparently.

Not at all. There was nothing that said he could not defend himself, just that he would be fined if he discharged a weapon. If he chooses to let his child be injured to avoid paying the fine, that's OK. If he chooses to protect his child and pay the fine - again, that's OK. He can do that. If he wants to live in a place that doesn't have fines for such behavior, then that's his choice as well.

If I was faced with an intruder, I would do whatever was necessary to protect myself and my family, and deal with the HOA/cops etc later. The decision whether to pay the fine or not should be made before you sign the papers for the house, not just before you pull the trigger.

>So let's go with the child example - should the homeowner put down
>his gun and call Animal Control?

His choice.

>Wouldn't that, or the actual situation, be in direct contradiction to
>your suggestion: "Why not do things ourselves instead of asking the
> government to do it for us?"

Nope! He is free to do whatever he chooses to do - including entering into a contract where he agrees to pay a fine if he performs certain actions.